Ruling out an expanding universe with conventional proofs

Mainstream has yet to show that GR applies anywhere but in the solar system in describing the behavior of solids, liquids and gasses. But then that's why they have to add 95% ad-hoc Fairie Dust when they apply that same math to the behavior of plasma. Why would anyone expect correct results from applying the math for solids, liquids and gasses to a universe 99% plasma???? No one does that in the lab with plasma, so mainstream still has yet to justify doing so in space and requiring 95% ad-hoc Fairie Dust for doing so, against every single laboratory experiment with plasma ever performed.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.

1. Because everywhere "but" the solar system you require 95% ad-hoc Fairie Dust. That's why flat rotation curves don't match what is predicted.2. Show me one single plasma experiment where the gravitational force was ever any consideration at all? Solids, liquids and gasses are "neutral" - that is they have equal numbers of protons and electrons in their atomic makeup. Plasma responds strongly to the electromagnetic force and acts collectively. And hence galaxies (99% plasma) rotate collectively.3. To the behavior of plasma - 99% of the universe - instead of where it only applies - to the behavior of solids, liquids and gasses (solar systems - planets), 1% of the universe.And hence they require a 95% fudge factor for applying the incorrect theory to the situation at hand. The behavior of charged particles, not "neutral" matter. But then if people knew what plasma was and how it behaved, they would know this. But I expect that's why Plasma Physics isn't required study in a universe 99% plasma, and why they require 95% Fairie Dust. Go figure.Edited by justatruthseeker, : No reason given.